Cookies Policy

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here

The Emergent EU Policy on Asylum and Refugees

No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.

Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the BrillOnline platform automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the Library. Brill MyBook is a print-on-demand paperback copy which is sold at a favorably uniform low price.

Access this article

+ Tax (if applicable)
Add to Favorites
You must be logged in to use this functionality

image of Nordic Journal of International Law

The Treaty of Amsterdam situates European asylum policy within a new institutional framework which is analysed with regard to the question how much progress has been achieved in this policy area. The assessment is based on an examination of asylum policy under the Maastricht Treaty and an analysis of its deficiencies. The output produced during the Maastricht era is evaluated by applying a measuring scale consisting of criteria such as efficiency, impact, democratic and judicial control, inner consistency, and respect for international obligations of member States. The analysis shows that the Maastricht Treaty neither provided a functioning nor an adequate framework for asylum policy on the European level. Instead of cautious cooperation of national approaches the policy area requires European harmonisation by issuing binding common texts which are interpreted in a unified manner. An important step in this direction will be taken by virtue of the Amsterdam Treaty which, however, also contains several potential obstacles to the harmonisation process. Furthermore, the increased access to binding legal instruments is not accompanied by an appropriate increase of democratic participation.

Affiliations: 1: Max-Planck-Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law, Heidelberg, Germany


Full text loading...


Data & Media loading...

Article metrics loading...



Can't access your account?
  • Tools

  • Add to Favorites
  • Printable version
  • Email this page
  • Subscribe to ToC alert
  • Get permissions
  • Recommend to your library

    You must fill out fields marked with: *

    Librarian details
    Your details
    Why are you recommending this title?
    Select reason:
    Nordic Journal of International Law — Recommend this title to your library
  • Export citations
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation